Who at the White House do you want answering the phone at 2 a.m.?

“Who do you want answering that 2a.m. call to the White House?” Remember that add by Hillary as she campaigned against Obama? Well, that call came. It came on September 11, 2012.

State Department 2a.m. phone: “Ring! Ring! Ring … Ring!”

                “Hello, State Department 2a.m. phone. What’s up?”

                “We are under attack! Send Help!”

                “Who is this, please?”

                “I’m the Ambassador in Benghazi. We’re under armed attack, send help!”

                “I’m sorry but Secretary Hillary isn’t available. This doesn’t sound like a diplomatic issue anyway. You need the Commander in Chief (BHO) to make the decision to send troops. I’ll transfer you.” Click.

White House 2a.m. phone: “Ring! Ring! Ring … Ring!”

                “Hello. White House 2a.m. phone. What’s up?”

                “We’re under armed attack. If you don’t send help we’ll be overrun and murdered!”

                “Who is this, please?”

                “I’m the Ambassador to Libya. I need to talk to the President (BHO).  We’re being attacked by terrorists!”

                “Are you with the State Department?”

                “Yes, you twit; I told you I’m the Ambassador to Libya. We are under armed attack. We need military help ASAP!”

                “This sounds like a State Department issue. Please call Secretary Hillary. Besides the President (BHO) has an early flight to the west coast for a fund raiser. Oh, wait, if you need military help, you should call one of the Military Services. Would you like their numbers?” (Sounds of gunfire.) “I’ll transfer you to the State Department’s 2a.m phone.”

Which one do you want at the White House to answer that call for emergency response to a crisis anywhere in the world? Neither one is the answer!

A Beautiful Mind at Work

What a Beautiful Mind. The Arkansas Governor (Beebe) may be the smartest guy in the room. Faced with an estimated (by the ‘Pew Center) one billion dollar outlay for more prisons over the next ten years, The  Governor pushed through the Democratic Legislature an expenditure saving  bill that no longer required “Non-violent” criminals  (outlaws) to serve time in jail. (Thus saving his pledge to the public to further reduce the sales tax on groceries, one presumes.)

                The apparently assumed solution to this saving of a billion dollars—add more Parole Officers to handle this increased workload, but require the non-incarcerated felon to pay for his own room and board. Unbeknownst to the unsuspecting public,  it was not even necessary to add additional Parole Officers and their associated costs. The Parole Board had a policy that allows parolees to just fail to report and there is no effort to track them down. After their parole time expires, their records are closed as “Parole Completed.” A beautiful bureaucratic solution to a budget dilemma: don’t spend money on either end. Don’t incarcerate them and don’t bother to track or chase parole violators. No Money spent on either end and the problem solved—what a beautiful mind at work! 

                “What?”

                “Well, there is that, the prospect of increased crime. But hey, The Gov. has his own private Arkansas State Police detail to protect him. Plus the ‘Pew estimate topped out at only 8,000-10,000 additional freed felons (un-incarcerated outlaws) on the streets. Hardly a number to get all riled up about. Besides, they’re non-violent outlaws, you wimp.”

               "What?"

               "Well, yes there are those few reported incidents of one of these "un-incarcerated outlaws" subsequently committing a violent crime. Yes, so one or two did murder someone. But hey! We are just starting this program."

                 No wonder the 2013 Republican Legislature eased up on permitting private citizens to become armed for their own protection. Apparently they desired to at least give us a fighting chance.

Why is Officer Hastings on Trial?

Why is Officer Hastings on trial? We hire and train men and women to protect us from society’s meanest and worst, as well as from the "non-violent" outlaw. When a cop does answer the call in the dark of the night and gun fire erupts and an outlaw falls, society calls for some retribution against the cop. Why?

                A terrified citizen calls 911: “Burglary in progress. Send the cops!”

                Officer Hastings, first responder, arrives in the dark, to answer a citizen’s call about “outlaws” at work. He sees three men doing their unlawful deeds and, at risk of his own life, steps out and tells them “Stop!” True, the scene becomes murky. Three outlaws are in a moving vehicle; the officer stands exposed—literally a deer caught in the headlights—in front of the moving vehicle. Are they armed? Will they shoot? Will they run him over? Will they surrender?

                Surely the Police Training included  such information as: a running human can cover 20 feet in 2 seconds; a moving vehicle can cover over a hundred feet in 2 seconds. Standing alone, in the dark, Officer Hastings has less than two seconds to make a decision: dead cop hero, stop the outlaws, or let them go free to continue their career of crime. He fires.

                The result—a live cop and three outlaws now under police custody. Tragically one dies. Even more tragically, he was a teenager. Officer Hastings knew not their age, and in the dark, probably nothing else. He only knew that three outlaws were driving a 2,000 pound deadly weapon and in a horrific two seconds concluded they were moving forward to murder him.

                Why is Officer Hasting on trial? Maybe I’m prejudiced—I respect cops and their willingness to put on that badge every morning and go out to face society's worst, risking of their lives for me and mine.